Well, the sea connections are mostly based on historical facts. For example, Silla was allied with Tang (which wasn't really a part of Korea, but is included because of that association) so the direct sea connection between them fits. The yellow junks between mainland Tang and Tang's Korean holdings also make sense...

On the other hand, having sea connections on the same side of the peninsula is only logical, in that seafaring wasn't very advanced at that point in time, and it was easier to travel shorter distances rather than long ones, by sea.

From a gameplay perspective, a lot of the connections are designed to keep the map from being too bottlenecked.

Hi. I hope this is the appropriate place to raise such a concern... I just want to say that I've played this map a few times and it's awesome, but it absolutely sucks for colourblind people like myself. Thanks to the labelling and the borders, I can more or less guess which regions belong to which kingdoms (still haven't figured out what kingdom Gaya is shared with though!), but the junks had me really confused for a long time, sorry. I got myself into a spot a couple of times because I misread the connections.

So, I don't know if it's too much to ask for you to go for colours that are a little more distinctive? The washed-out colours on this map make it very attractive, but also confusing.

I'm not sure if anything can be done with the colours. The Jpeg format in which the maps are hosted on the site reduces the colour depth considerably, which means the colours will be somewhat washed out no matter what I do to them.

I like that new image. I'm a big fan of the map, and like the dark aspect, but it is a little too dark even for me. I think those new colors would not only lighten the map, but still work with the style and theme, as even the warriors wore bright colors such as gold and red, etc.

the brown of Silla is much easier to see, i like the green of Baekje, it works better with the colours of Silla and Goguryea.

i think it would be better if Tang stood out more in the shared areas. it does look better, just not as good an improvement as the other colours.

in an earlier post you said

this is Three Kingdoms of Korea, or Korea 57-668AD but it's not just Korea.

i know CC has recently chnged the name in the database to 3 kingdoms but i was wondering if you have considered at any point putting those years on your map. i know it is a historical map and what period in time because you told me so but Korea (and Korean history) is not well known and so i think most people here would not immediately recognise it for what it is like we might a map such as American Civil War or 13 Colonies.

i say this because when i first saw this map i thought wow, Korea is map up of 3 kingdoms. i still don't know if Korea is currently made up of 3 kingdoms (much like Australia has 6 states and the USA has 50 states) or if that is a thing of the past.

greenoaks wrote:i know CC has recently chnged the name in the database to 3 kingdoms but i was wondering if you have considered at any point putting those years on your map.

I don't think so... the map doesn't depict any certain time, it's more a general depiction of the Three Kingdoms era which spans several centuries... therefore I don't think adding those years on the map would add much to the map.

Anyway, here's a version with increased saturation and contrast. I separated the map to chroma/luminance channels and applied saturation to chroma only, and contrast to luminance only. This increases the difference between the colours and should improve legibility.

Note that these are png:s, so the final jpeg image will still be a little less saturated.

DiM wrote:what? that's absurd. why would a map get better treatment than others?

Beats me.

wow. i just realised my mogul map was reduced from a 831k PNG to a 174k GIF. a gif? wtf?

and we actually bother to scope every pixel and fix the smallest imperfections to get that perfect png only to get it reduced to a 256 colours gif.

Hey, you're preaching to the choir, man. I've long been wondering why we bother to have any graphics standards in the first place, or why we bother demanding mapmakers to spend any effort to the map graphics, since the maps get compressed to garbage anyway...

I've tried to campaign for increasing the size allowance for map images, since most people have faster connections now than they had in 2006, and map images are cached in the browser anyway... but so far the results have been lacking (no pun intended).

I'm a bit late but I just want to say the colours in the new pictures you've put up are much easier to see. I still think putting green and brown next to each other (Silla/Baekje) was not an inspired choice from a visibility point of view, but I wouldn't expect you to change that at this late stage.

I've been wondering, if I could just set all capitals to 3 neutrals... Multiplayer games probably won't notice either way, if they have to take a 3 or 4... and for team games, it could just make them useful again.

Though I did discover something while in Japan... the term Wa is a racist term used by the Chinese against the Japanese... it means essentially "the midget barbarians" and was a large cause of the war between Japan and China in 1894-5 because China insisted on referring to the Japanese as Wa in diplomatic exchanges.

So in the name of avoiding war between Japan and conquer club and possibly myself or Natty_Dread I suggest changing the word Wa to Yamato